"This explosive book is a long-needed answer to court histories that continue to obscure key facts about our backstage war with Moscow. Must-reading for serious students of security issues and Cold War deceptions, both foreign and domestic."

-- M. Stanton Evans, author of Stalin's Secret Agents and Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies

"It is not simply a good book about history. It is one of those books which makes history. ... "

-- Vladimir Bukovsky, author of To Build a Castle and co-founder of the Soviet dissident movement, and Pavel Stroilov, author of Behind the Desert Storm.

"I have read it, and agree wholeheartedly."

-- Angelo Codevilla, Professor Emeritus of International Relations at Boston Unversity, and fellow of the Claremont Institute.

"A brilliantly researched and argued book."

-- Edward Jay Epstein, author of Deception: The Invisible War between the KGB and the CIA,The Annals 0f Unsolved Crime

"As Diana West writes in her remarkable book, American Betrayal, we have `new totalitarians who look to Mecca instead of Moscow.' "

-- Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House of Representatives

"I've been, quite frankly, mesmerized by Diana West and her new book American Betrayal. If you get it (a) you won't put it down, and (b) you'll be flipping back to the notes section because every paragraph your hair's going to be on fire."

-- Stephen K. Bannon, Breitbart News Radio

"Every once in a while, something happens that turns a whole structure of preconceived ideas upside down, shattering tales and narratives long taken for granted, destroying prejudice, clearing space for new understanding to grow. Diana West's latest book, American Betrayal, is such an event."

-- Henrik Raeder Clausen, Europe News

No book has ever frightened me as much as American Betrayal. ... [West] patiently builds a story outlining a network of subversion so bizarrely immense that to write it down will seem too fantastic to anyone without the book’s detailed breadth and depth. It all adds up to a story so disturbing that it has changed my attitude to almost everything I think about how the world actually is. ... By the time you put the book down, you have a very different view of America’s war aims and strategies. The core question is, did the USA follow a strategy that served its own best interests, or Stalin’s? And it’s not that it was Stalin’s that is so compelling, since you knew that had to be the answer, but the evidence in detail that West provides that makes this a book you cannot ignore.

Her task is ambitious; her sweep of crucial but too-little-known facts of history is impressive; and her arguments are eloquent and witty. ...American Betrayal is one of those books that will change the way many of us see the world.

-- Susan Freis Falknor, Blue Ridge Forum

“What Diana West has done is to dynamite her way through several miles of bedrock. On the other side of the tunnel there is a vista of a new past. Of course folks are baffled. Few people have the capacity to take this in. Her book is among the most well documented I have ever read. It is written in an unusual style viewed from the perspective of the historian—but it probably couldn’t have been done any other way.”

-- Lars Hedegaard, historian, editor, Dispatch International

"Diana West's new book rewrites WWII and Cold War history not by disclosing secrets, but by illuminating facts that have been hidden in plain sight for decades. Furthermore, she integrates intelligence and political history in ways never done before."

-- Jeffrey Norwitz, former professor of counterterrorism, Naval War College

Although I know [Christopher] Andrew well, and have met [Oleg] Gordievsky twice, I now doubt their characterization of Hopkins -- also embraced by Radosh and the scholarly community. I now support West's conclusions after rereading KGB: The Inside Story account 23 years later [relevant passages cited in American Betrayal]. It does not ring true that Hopkins was an innocent dupe dedicated solely to defeating the Nazis. Hopkins comes over in history as crafty, secretive and no one's fool, hardly the personality traits of a naïve fellow traveler. And his fingerprints are on the large majority of pro-Soviet policies implemented by the Roosevelt administration. West deserves respect for cutting through the dross that obscures the evidence about Hopkins, and for screaming from the rooftops that the U.S. was the victim of a successful Soviet intelligence operation.

Diana West’s American Betrayal — a remarkable, novel-like work of sorely needed historical re-analysis — is punctuated by the Cassandra-like quality of “multi-temporal” awareness. ... But West, although passionate and direct, is able to convey her profoundly disturbing, multi-temporal narrative with cool brilliance, conjoining meticulous research, innovative assessment, evocative prose, and wit.

-- Andrew G. Bostom, PJ Media

Do not be dissuaded by the controversy that has erupted around this book which, if you insist on complete accuracy, would be characterized as a disinformation campaign.

-- Jed Babbin, The American Spectator

The most important anti-Communist book of our time. ... Mrs. West is one of the most important writers on the strategic and moral consequences of Communist penetration of the U.S. Government.

-- J.R. Nyquist, contributor, And Reality Be Damned ... What Media Didn't Tell You about the End of the Cold War and the Fall of Communism in Europe

The polemics against your Betrayal have a familiar smell: The masters of the guild get angry when someone less worthy than they are ventures into the orchard in which only they are privileged to harvest. The harvest the outsider brought in, they ritually burn.

-- Hans Jansen, former professor of Islamic Thought, University of Utrecht

West's lesson to Americans: Reality can't be redacted, buried, fabricated, falsified, or omitted. Her book is eloquent proof of it.

-- Edward Cline, Family Security Matters

In American Betrayal, Ms. West's well-established reputation for attacking "sacred cows" remains intact. The resulting beneficiaries are the readers, especially those who can deal with the truth.

-- Wes Vernon, Renew America

After reading American Betrayal and much of the vituperation generated by neoconservative "consensus" historians, I conclude that we cannot ignore what West has demonstrated through evidence and cogent argument.

-- John Dale Dunn, M.D., J.D., Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons

Enlightening. I give American Betrayal five stars only because it is not possible to give it six.

-- John Dietrich, formerly of the Defense Intelligence Agency and author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy.

If you're looking for something to read, this is the most dazzling, mind-warping book I have read in a long time. It has been criticized by the folks at Front Page, but they don't quite get what Ms. West has set out to do and accomplished. I have a whole library of books on communism, but -- "Witness" excepted -- this may be the best.

-- Jack Cashill, author of Deconstructing Obama: The Lives, Loves and Letters of America's First Postmodern Presidentand First Strike: TWA Flight 800 and the Attack on America

President Trump's executive action on immigration is a terrific shock to international socialism, whose sinews, including "free" trade, mass immigration/open borders, Globalism First, have come to undergird the American Way. In such a Marxian system, borders, the nation-state, America First, are not just anathema, they are "reactionary" relics, and effectively defunct. Or supposed to be.

In other words, no president is ever supposed to not only say but act on the following:

In order to protect Americans, the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward...

In 2009, Vladimir Bukovsky delivered a striking speech setting forth his ideas about why it was the West did not win the Cold War. Some of these same ideas served as stepping stones in my own excursions in American Betrayal.

Read about the six (6) members of the Rosenberg Ring who went to high school where and while Philip Horowitz taught here.

---

I don't really know what to do with this stuff as it pops up, except to post it, kind of like an open desk drawer.

So, to that end, and in brief, two items.

I was watching David Horowitz on with Tucker Carlson, who introduced him by saying some such: "David Horowitz is someone who knows about Russians. HIs parents were ardent Commnuists who left the Party after learning of Stalin's atrocities."

This is, to be sure, how Horowitz makes it out, writing in Radical Son that on reading about Krushchev's famous speech about some of Stalin's crimes in 1956, "their world collapsed -- along with their will to struggle."

All but the trimmings of Page One and Two belong to a woman named Amanda Kleinman, who, we are told, is the leading victim of the headline's "Troll Patrol" -- online harassment resulting from that "viral fake news conspiracy theory" known as "Pizzagate."

What is "Pizzagate?" Whatever it is, it is either not on the media menu (a la Breitbart); or it is served up by news organs such as the Washington Post as a complete nothing -- the original scoop of "fake news" as cooked up by "the Internet" beginning with the John Podesta Wikileaked emails that include possibly unusual, possibly coded references to "pizza," also something called "Spirit Cooking."

For example, in one of the stranger "pizza" exchanges, a realtor on Martha's Vineyard writes to Democrat moneybags Susan and Herbert Sandler (the latter, per Wikileaks, a patron of Podesta) to let them know that some items were forgotten in a rental, including "a square cloth handkerchief (white with black) that was left on the kitchen island." Do they want it back?

From inner sanctum to inner sanctum, this is the conversation that has been buzzing around the District of Columbia:

So, the Deplorables won an election and sent their man to Washington. Well, now, he's on our turf and plays by our rules.

Yeah!

So goes the collective thinking of "Washington," that shining co-op on a hill, where average men and women of above-average ambition and self-esteem have flim-flammed their way through the ballot box, climbed the think tank ladder, or honed the corporate sound-byte to come together in a promised land of uniparty perks and and special kind of firepower, suit-and-tied workers dedicated to preserving that same liberal world order foisted on the American people so very long...

On listening to President Trump's Inaugural address, I could not have been more pleased than to have heard, loud and clear, the theme of "America First." This is the revolutionary underpinning of the Trump movement, a re-ordering of the liberal "world order" that the Bushes and Clintons and Obamas on the stage yesterday represented, vanquished, in a transfer of power unlike any other in memory.

The People have just repudiated these policies; however, they remain the framework and orientation for politics and media establishments in America and elsewhere. This is precisely why it was so significant that Trump reiterated the America First theme. The brand new president eschewed the dangerously doctrinaire platitudes of "universalism" and "democracy building" of all modern Inaugural addresses (forgoing passing plaudits from Washington elites) not only because it really seems he doesn't believe them, but because he also seems to understand that his power derives directly from the 63 million Americans who voted for him. If he checks out on them and "goes Washington," they check out on him, and he's done. It's a match made-in-America heaven.

When Sen. Joseph McCarthy died, shockingly, at the age of 48, he, his aides and his committee had identified at least fifty Soviet agents, ideological communists and Fifth Amendment pleaders, dedicated to the overthrow of our constitutional system, and loyal/sympathetic to Stalin, Mao and a new wave of genocidal dictators. (Indeed, here are two more.)

"Russian hacking" is the Left/Never-Trumpers' explanation for Donald Trump's election.

In their furrowed-brow-telling, they have recently discovered something called "Russian interference" and "Russian influence." Don't ask where so many of them have been all of our lives, because they've spent about the past century telling us there was no such thing.

That was then. Today, they insist that this newfound "Russian interference" and "Russian influence" secretly drove nearly 63 million American deplorables to reach for that GOP lever again and again to vote for Donald Trump, not Hillary Clinton.

Let me squeeze in a little historical context. The late, great Sen. Joseph McCarthy himself was not wont to make such sweeping, conspiratorial...

Ever wonder why the UN is a perennial force for Evil and the anti-American way?

It was the brainchild of Soviet agents.

No kidding. So much of our history has been stolen from us that I doubt even those currently and publicly bristling at the UN's latest depredations against Israel (still holding the front line of the Western front) from Donald Trump to Charles Krauthammer, have any knowledge of this elementary fact. Nonetheless, the hidden/forgotten/suppressed record...

These topics make an apt duo, both being about the lengths to which free people go to enslave themselves to Party and/or party discipline: in the former case, the press and political class puling out the stops to undermine Trump; in the latter, the press and political class...

In a world where journalism was about breaking news and not preserving the information vaccum, the da-da-esque "Russian hacking" mantra would be a joke around any newsroom -- not received and hallowed orthodoxy to the exclusion of any possibly emerging facts, testimonies, logic, historical context, or even conjecture that might cause a sentient being to doubt it.

In such a healthier world, where journalism was about exposing tyrants, crooks and conspiracies, the toxic tangle of overlapping links and financial connections between John Podesta, the Center for American Progress (the think tank he led), and Russian state piggy banks would not remain for months near-exclusive to investigative journalist Peter Schweizer.

Here is a video of a new speech I unveiled at a July 13 symposium on "American Strategy: The Way Forward," sponsored by the Institute for the Study of Strategy and Politics. The speech is titled, "`America First' in America, 1940-2016."

I have one correction: In listing the widely variious Americans who participated in the America First Committee priot to World War II, I mention William Henry Regnery as the eventual founder of Regnery Books. The founding publisher was his son, Henry Regnery.

Arizona's legendary Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio held a press conference yesterday to present the latest findings of the Cold Case Posse investigation into the veracity of the Barack Obama long-form birth certificate displayed on the White House website.

In 1950, Supreme Court Associate Justice Robert H. Jackson listed the critical differences that separate the Communist Party from all other American political parties, as related in American Betrayal:

Among the six key differences Jackson cited— including Party aims to seize power by and for a minority, Party membership secrecy, the Party requirement of unquestioning obedience to Party authority—he wrote, “The Communist Party alone among American parties past or present is dominated and controlled by a foreign Government.”

He continued, “The chain of command from the Kremlin to the American party is stoutly denied and usually invisible, but it was unmistakenly disclosed by...

In many ways, my 2013 book American Betrayal is a history of Big Lies -- where they come from, how they are weaponized, and how they subverted our democratic republic despite the yeoman efforts of American patriots, largely forgotten, or, in the singular case of the late, great Sen. Joseph McCarthy, eternally slandered, to wrest the truth from American liars, many of whom are now on pedestals.

In the current chatter about "fake news," its origins in the totalitarian manipulations of the Big Lie, that flexing of ideology, political power, and what we used to call mass media that first came together over 85 years ago in the Ukraine Terror Famine, have been lost.

What is "fake news"? The short definition is, Anything that doesn't advance the Left/Establishment agenda. It has rapidly become the falsest term of art, a mere slogan, much like "war on women," that masquerades as a dire warning label against our very grasp on reality. Did Donald Trump win 31 states on November 8, thus becoming president-elect of the United States?

Yes, but ... "fake news." Don't you know?... Russian influence on the election. CIA and all that ... hush hush.

No one in the propaganda business (formerly known as MSM) even tries to connect these disjointed dots, doubtless because doing so requires filling in with the grotesque depth and breadth of corruption and malfeasance involving Democrat political and media machinery as (partly)...

Having been over COIN with a fine tooth comb for years, my entries on Kilcullen, Mullen, Petraeus, McChrystal, Allen and their ilk, up and down the chain of command (including their bunkum-swami, Greg "Three Cups" Mortenson), are quite voluminous. I find no Mattis, however. This is a little curious, given his shared role with Petraeus in "catalyzing" the bankrupt COIN doctrine and manual, not to mention his allure for COIN-happy Bill Kristol, who tried and failed to energize an anti-Trump presidential groundswell for Mattis last spring.

Speaking of Petraeus and Mattis -- "the two general officers who catalyzed the new [COIN] doctrine" -- behold Marine Lt . Col. Matt Baker (commanding officer of 1st Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment), practicing a highly catalyzed form of COIN in Nawa, Afghanistan, in late 2009:

It is hard to decide whether Ronald Radosh is more incompetent than liar; or more liar than incompetent. What marries the two, however, is a malicious intent to deceive so maybe it hardly matters.

Take the latest Radosh mess, or, to use the term a la mode, his latest installment of "fake news" aimed at Trump senior strategist Stephen K. Bannon. I refer to Radosh's increasingly non-credible story that Bannon came up to him at a "book party" at the Breitbart Embassy, which doubles as Steve Bannon's home, and, unsolicited, revealed himself to Radosh to be a "Leninist."

Radosh has now pegged this alleged incident to three different dates -- surely evidence of incompetence ... but then there are all the lies.

All of it is increasingly hard to overlook out there, as when Salon executive editor Andrew O'Hehir's incredulity shows through on...

When I decided to address you here today, by making a final statement in this trial against freedom of speech, many people reacted by telling me it is useless. That you, the court, have already written the sentencing verdict a while ago. That everything indicates that you have already convicted me. And perhaps that is true. Nevertheless, here I am. Because I never give up. And I have a message for you and The Netherlands.

For centuries, the Netherlands are a symbol of freedom.

Who one says Netherlands, one says freedom. And that is also true, perhaps especially, for those who have a different opinion than the establishment, the opposition.

In a well-researched story with links to key documents, Morgan Chalfont of the Washington Free Beacon reports that the Pentagon officials hired and paid by US taxpayers to find US servicemen still missing and unaccounted for from the wars of the 20th century, including World War II, told their Russian counterparts in May of this year that there was "no evidence" that US troops missing in the Korean War had been taken to the Soviet Union.

I am wondering how to write about The War on Steve Bannon without using the smear terms "white nationalist," "racist," "anti-semite," that are continuously blasting out in heavy streams of toxic waste at Bannon's reputation, career and, please do not forget, soul, as the media-political complex reassembles to overwhelm and neutralize this great and talented patriot as he prepares to take the strategic helm of the Trump White House.

The good news is that support is all around him, as colleagues and strangers, former employees and business partners, political allies and even a council leader in Samaria publish articles, statements and testimonials, denying these heinously baseless charges, exposing them for the tactical dark ops of the Establishment that they are.

The key thing to understand about this War on Steve Bannon is that it is a war on all of us. If he goes down, we go down. If he goes down, Trump's presidency goes down. That's because in this war to demonize Bannon's beliefs and opinions, ours are being demonized, too. Love of country, with borders? "White nationalism." America First trade and foreign policy? "Racism." Run a stupid headline by David Horowitz? "Anti-semitism." If they win, we lose. For keeps.

Here it is, folks, the nitty gritty on the revolution inside the education system that graduates the hysterics we see on the campuses and in the streets who seem mentally unable to grasp the fact that an election took place, and their candidate lost.

You know what? They are unable to grasp this fact or any other. That's because, as the deeply knowledgeable Robin Eubanks explains to Jeff Nyquist and Allen Dos Santos on "Update Brazil," they have been so taught and by design. Children learn ideas and attitudes at school, not facts, and we are seeing the results in action: Soros fodder.

It's mourning in leftist-crazy Fashionworld -- Hillary Clinton lost -- and black crepe is the new black. The New York Times may well have included a question mark in the headline -- "Is Fashion's Love Affair with Washington Over?" -- but there is zero doubt. So nutsy-cuckoo are these creative critters that they are convinced that the election of Donald Trump, which brings to the White House a handsome family of gorgeous fashion models and fashion brands, is the end of Everything Fashion.

The thought of not having to come up with four years' worth of jewel-tone pant suits, Mao jackets and oven mitts actually has them blubbering into their schmatas. Why? Because the Left lost power.

About that popular vote victory the Left is claiming over Donald Trump.

The latest tallies show that after millions of Americans citizens, fraudsters and non-citizens voted for president, Donald Trump won 59,704,886 votes and Hillary Clinton won 59,938,290.

That's 233,304 more votes in Hillary's column. But is this margin of popular victory the will of legally registered American voters?

In 2014, three political scientists from Old Dominion University and George Mason University looked back at earlier elections to study whether any of an estimated 19.4 million adult non-citizens in the US voted in the 2008 election. After much surveying, sampling and extrapolating, their best guess -- the "adjusted estimate" -- was to suggest that a whopping 1.2 million...

Voting was light on Election Day morning in the District of Columbia, which means nothing twice because 1) there is now early voting here, and 2) it's the District of Columbia.

Nonetheless, I have done my joyous duty by voting for Trump-Pence (and rejecting Statehood -- all we need in lillold D.C. is several new, completely unnecessary revenue drains and layers of bureacracy/corruption).

Now, we wait, pray -- and stay vigilant!

The Trump team has sent out a voter hotline number to call if anyone encounters problems when voting or witnesses any disruptions: 844-332-2016

When Trump voters are dismissed as uneducated, the implication obvious. If only these poor, dumb-dumbs had had the benefit of the best education money and position in America can finagle and buy, they would now make the educated choice: Hillary Clinton.

Take CNBC's John Harwood, whose credentials as a CNBC's chief Washington correpondent are sterling. His father was a Washington Post reporter. He appeared as an 11-year-old in an ad for Robert Kennedy's presidential campaign, which his father was also covering -- "nothing to do with my participation," Harwood...

The World Series is over (I was rooting for the "politically incorrect" team); the Election of All Elections is still a few days off (I am definitely rooting for the "politically incorrect" candidate!); so there really is no better time than now to take a listen to my brand new ICON lecture, "Where Did `Politically Incorrect' Come From, and What Is It Doing?"

We can all breathe a sigh of relief: Bill Kristol has launched his "gut" hunch on the Election outcome and it's Hillary. That's a pretty good augur for Trump's ultimate success.

The polls for Trump are promising, too. And three cheers for Wikileaks and also Judicial Watch for doing the job American journalists won't do. Still, there remain several eternities between us and Election Day, so for any fence-sitters out there, here are a few must-reads.

The first is an interview at Pajamas Media with Kathy Shelton's lawyer and advocate, Candice Jackson, by John L. Work, a retired law enforcement officer, whose many years as a detective included investigating multiple sex crimes. This interview teases out new details about the case that may tels us more about Hillary as a person than any other, spotlighting her callousness and ruthlessness in this trampling of a 12 year old rape...

A word from Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV) leader Geert Wilders on why he is not participating in his continuing persecution by the Dutch state in yet another "hate speech" trial over the vital political question of immigration policy and border control.

"Do you want more of less Moroccans?" Wilders asked in a stump speech -- and so the State puts him in the dock, as if this were not a question mere Dutch voters should ever hear, weigh and vote on, potentially braking the governing parties' mass import of Moroccans and other Muslims into once-Dutch society, where, it is a repetitious matter of record, Moroccans are grossly over-represented in jihad, welfare and crime statistics.

Meanwhile, it is not as if these same governing politicians do not react, and cholerically so, to these same problems. See what three Labor Party politicians have variously stated: "We also have shit...

I was given 250 words to reply to the Durham Herald Sun's report on a protest of my recent appearance in Chapel Hill. (Listen or download this excellent radio overview of the controversy, first with ICON director Janie Wagstaff, and then my discussion.)

The letter appeared on October 27, 2016.

To the editor --

A recent story includes unsubstantiated attacks on me.

I am not a “hate speaker” because I write about Islamic blasphemy law, which outlaws criticism of Islam and Mohammed, and for which the punishment is often death; or because I cover tyrannical speech codes that once-free societies are imposing as Western states submit...

Behold, my own personal protesters (above) in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, snapped en route to the parking lot of a lecture hall where I was to give a speech on October 18. My topic? The origins and impact of the Marxist-Bolshevik-Fabian-Socialist-Democrat-Progessive-Alinskyite-micro-aggression-trigger-warning censorship movement against truth and tradition that is opaquely known as "politically correct."

Ironic, no?

Actually, we're way past ironic, and deep into the danger zone where the ideological and the doctrinaire dominate discourse -- but also make people cower. As I explained nearly ten years ago in my first book, The Death of the Grown-Up, this same "politically correct" movement to silence speech and political discourse generally has made common cause with...

Paul Nachman discusses this remarkable video compilation, showcasing Donald J. Trump through the decades, "declaring his love of country and acknowledging a reluctant willingness—if he sees the need—to step up and serve it."

The consistency, the clarity is striking, also inspiring.

Trump has been thinking about how to #MAGA adult life at least since he was in his early 30s.

A good point. Looking back on the vicious attacks on Sarah Palin and her family, I came across a series of 2010 tweets from one of those dime-a-dozen demons among us, this one in the post-modern guise of a "comedian" known as Louis C.K., real name Louis Szekely.

The tweets, which I missed the first time around, are the vile ravings of a demented person. They are also, in postmodern parlance, "sexist," "offensive" and demeaning -- dehumanizing -- to anyone reading such stupidly obscene invective about an exceptional American woman who is a wife, mother, former governor or Alaska, and former GOP vice presidential candidate.

No, of course, Louis C.K. is not running for president. His filthy remarks about Palin are...

This is the first paragraph of an email from Bill Ivey to John Podesta, which was among a Wikileaks release this week, as first reported by Infowars' Paul Joseph Watson here.

Bill Ivey is a well-connected Democrat with a capital "D." According to his bio at his website, titled, Global Cultural Strategies, this folklore scholar and "experienced non profit executive" served as Bill Clinton's NEA director from 1998-2001, is a trustee for the Center for American Progress, and was a "Team Leader in the Barack Obama presidential transition."

John Podesta, of course, is chairman of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.

There is something almost magical about this three and a half minutes of video, capturing that pre-debate moment when Donald Trump began again to pull back his slingshot and aim, this time with more accuracy and sureness, at the Uniparty-Unimedia Behemoth; this time, with righteous women at his side.

Paula, Juanita and Kathleen: Thank you for standing up and speaking out about what the Clintons did to you for all these many years. Kathy, thank you for coming forward more recently to add your name to this crucially important quest to expose the Clintons' corruption and violation not only of your precious persons, but of the entire body politic.

You, and women like you, personally suffered the torment that the rapacious and meglomanical Clinton couple has inflicted; and that the political-media phalanx, from MSM-Left to Bush-Family-Right, which has served and protected the Clintons for all of these decades, made seemingly eternal. It is this phalanx that stood in the way of justice; that ignored...

Did this lewdest, crudest and most putrid behavior (not talk), ever drive press and Democratic party elders to call on President Bill Clinton to resign? Never.

---

As the globalists leave what they hope and pray and have planned and calculated is a sinking USS Deplorables, opening hatches as they disembark, preening, in a cloud of noxious hypocrisy, it is not enough to say, Good riddance.

It is time to nail their hypocrisy to the wall, revealing the moral depravity underneath -- and, more immediately dangerous, the political movement that will finally and completely destroy this nation under another Clinton.

This is a long (maybe lifelong) project. But time is short. I will focus today narrowly on the hypocrisy of the onslaught du jour -- how it is that the political-media complex is trying to eliminate Donald Trump before Election Day with calls for him to "step aside" over his 2005 hot mic conversation on a tv set with host Billy Bush. This was released to "the press" on the same day that a signal 2013 speech to a Brazilian bank by Hillary Clinton came to us little people, not from the dark arts masters of the Clinton campaign, of course, but through Wikileaks.

On the tenth anniversary of Wikileaks, Julian Assange spoke with Spiegel, which, in case it is unclear from the interview questions below, is a publication of the journalistic persuasion.

I find I have not written about Assange for some years. I wrote in his defense back when the Rightward world, from Rush to Jonah Goldberg to Sarah Palin to Bill Kristol and on and on, was calling for his head, literally, in murderous terms not inspired even by an Aldrich Ames. On review, I also find this nasty bit from...

While pondering whether we will ever realize how good we had it when riches and plenty were such that the Washington Post could freak out about "gender barriers" in bartending (...let that sink in a moment...) I note the extent to which the Food section is raw agit prop.

From midway down the lead story by M. Carrie Allan, "Get Everyone in the Mix: The craft cocktail has helped some women rise as bartenders, but old biases die hard":

... But it’s made me wonder: When a subculture identifies deeply with a historical heyday in which women and minorities had little place, does some of that baggage seep into modern iterations, disguised as simple aesthetics?

What I'm trying to do is to promote a process of reorganization of the world so that human beings are organized in a way that takes advantage of the new opportunities of this era and permits them to beat back the problems. ...

Will this dark story become a campaign issue -- a matter set before the people as a measure of Hillary Clinton's character, and, it should be said, soul? By her own recorded audio account, Hillary Clinton was not simply providing professional legal counsel to a pedophile/rapist as our justice system requires. She was getting him off by any means necessary -- never mind the Arkansas 6th-grader who had been sexually and brutally assaulted -- at the beginning of a long, self-branded and thoroughly hypocritical career...

I could not have prepared better for Lou Dobbs' question last night regarding Trump's weaker polling with the weaker sex than having watched this video -- "I Thought You Should Know."

The video introduces a brutal rape of a 12-year-old girl that took place in 1975 in Arkansas. A 41-year-old man named Thomas Alfred Taylor stood trial. His defense counsel was a freshly minted lawyer named Hillary Rodham. She got him off.

Once you start reading more deeply into this case, thanks to the crack research of Alana Goodman for the Washington Free Beacon, which broke the story open in 2014, it becomes clear: This case is Hillary Clinton's Chappaquiddick -- the original moral stain, which, as with Ted Kennedy, once exposed, becomes her ultimate undoing.

Clinton's involvement in this Arkansas child-rape trial was not a matter of providing counsel to a defendant, as our system requires. It was jumping through...